Supreme Court rules exclusively Christian RE in NI is ‘indoctrination’

[IwantToRetire]

The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled in favour of a non-religious father and his child that the exclusively Christian teaching of Religious Education (RE) and collective worship in Northern Ireland are ‘indoctrination’. This is therefore discriminatory under human rights law. This ruling will have wide-ranging implications for the teaching of RE in Northern Ireland and for collective worship across the United Kingdom.

The case is known as JR87, and the original judgment in the High Court of Northern Ireland in 2022 was that ‘religious education and collective worship are not conveyed in an objective, critical, or pluralistic manner in Northern Ireland [schools].’ However, the Northern Ireland Department of Education appealed at the Court of Appeal last October. It ruled that while the RE curriculum was not objective, critical, or pluralistic, this was not sufficient to conclude there had been a breach of human rights law as this didn’t amount to indoctrination. The Court also ruled that the right to withdraw was not stigmatising. Northern Ireland Humanists intervened in the case.

The father and child appealed this decision to the Supreme Court, which has now ruled that a curriculum not being ‘objective, critical, or pluralistic’ and its being ‘indoctrinating’ are ‘two sides of the same coin’. The Court also ruled that the right of withdrawal is clearly stigmatising in a context where no other children are withdrawn. Parents having a ‘reasonable apprehension’ of such stigma is ‘sufficient’ enough to mean they do not have to have actually withdrawn their children, and found that stigma does indeed occur.

The ruling requires that RE curricula should not proselytise or indoctrinate, and that parental right of withdrawal alone from RE and collective worship is not a sufficient justification for having a non-objective, uncritical, or non-pluralistic syllabus.

Continues at https://humanists.uk/2025/11/19/supreme-court-rules-exclusively-christian-re-in-ni-is-indoctrination/

Is this applied to all religions across all schools in the UK? Or is it about the divide between Catholic and Protestand in NI?

(In case anyone misunderstands I think no religion should be taught in schools. )

This is about teaching of religion in NI not the UK more widely. Essentially this is about how the department for education set the curriculum for RE. Its was approved by I think the 4 main Christian churches and put too much emphasis on teaching the children how to practice Christianity and that there was a god rather than teaching them about religion. There was an opt out but in practice very few people would opt to do this for fear of stigmatising their child. Groups representing the other minority (in NI) religions objected and were basically ignored. Other religions aren’t taught about until GCSE I think. So lack of plurality in the curriculum and meaningful opt out essentially means indoctrination. That’s my reading of the Supreme Court ruling that explains it in an accessible way. People are over interpreting it that it means Christianity can’t be taught and woke judges but it’s not that at all. I think anyone taught in NI could probably relate. I went through it and no navigating it with my own child.

I think it’s about time religious organisations relinquished their hold of schools. Our local primary schools are Church of England and they have to sit through so many assemblies, prayers, and church gatherings - it is 100% trying to indoctrinate young impressionable minds.

Thanks.

I suppose the write was a bit influenced in that it was from the point of view of Humanists.

Although they do think it has implications across the UK.

This ruling will have wide-ranging implications for the teaching of RE in Northern Ireland and for collective worship across the United Kingdom.

Yes on reflection you are probably right. This means the equivalent curricula in England, Wales and Scotland should be considered in the same way. Are they non-objective, uncritical or non-pluralistic? The SC interpretation will apply to those too. I very much agree that RE should be about the different religions and children can make their own minds up with whatever the parental preference is occurring outside of school with church attendance etc.

I agree. My dcs' primary school in England had so much religion. It was a c of e school but all the local village schools around here are c of e so there isn't a choice.

It isn’t just RS, collective workship in schools used to be a requirement under primary legislation, eg assembly.

I’m glad about this ruling, as an atheist.

Ah yes. I forgot about that. The mandatory requirement for collective worship. Madness when you think about it.

Used to be? Is it still not technically required, though sensible school leadership teams work around it?

anyway, the ruling is good news and will hopefully lead to more changes.

I"m in NI and go to church but I'm pleased about the ruling. RE in school wasn't learning about religions, it was basically sunday school and taught as fact rather than belief (or was at my school when I went). I remember feeling deeply uncomfortable about an assignment we had to do writing about why it wouldn't be a good idea for us (with the assumption the class were christian) to be friends or date non-christians. There was nothing about Islam or Buddhism and only the jewish faith in so far as it was the precursor to christianity.

My husband did RE in England and learnt about lots of religions from a more objective standpoint and in our increasingly diverse country it's given him and understanding of and a connection with other religious communities.

we had to do writing about why it wouldn't be a good idea for us (with the assumption the class were christian) to be friends or date non-christians.

I went to a few schools (for various reasons) and they all had an assumed view that Christianity was the norm. Rural England.

And dont remember anything like this being said.

But then of course, maybe that assumption was so locked into those who ran the schools, that they and the families of the students would not every have contact with people who weren't "like" them.

Great result. Religion should be left for children to decide upon when they are older, not forced down their throats.

If they'll believe in santa and the Easter bunny they'll believe in the Christian god or Muslim God too. And there's no good evidence for any of it.

Leave impressionable minds alone.

Glad to hear this. The less indoctrinated religion, anywhere, the better.

@IwantToRetire, yes I remember it so clearly. It wasn't meant to be bigoted I don't think (though it was), but the answers we went through in class were things like, 'They may not have the same values as us and may encourage us to go out drinking' (shock horror). 'If you are in a relationship with a boy who isn't christian they may want to physical intimacy before marriage' etc.

All girls grammar school. We were all having lots of fun with boys in cars by that stage but dutifully wrote the answers anyway.

I grew up in NI and went to state i.e. Protestant schools. I don't know what the current curriculum in NI state schools is like, but at the time it was basically limited to mainline Protestant beliefs until GCSE stage, when there was a bit of teaching about other religions and secularism. I also learned hardly anything about Catholic beliefs at school despite living in an island that is majority Catholic.

I'm not saying that religion needs to be removed entirely from schools and we need to cancel nativity plays or something, but there definitely needs to be greater balance. Society has moved on and children will encounter a variety of religious beliefs and traditions. RE should be about education, not instruction in one particular interpretation of Christianity.